George Ellis on EXISTENCE

Georgina Woodward
I tried to link Sabine's video here .
"Chaos the real problem with quantum mechanuics"

Science should not propose an explanation for a happening ,a phenomenon or entity that is entirely unknown in type, not adequately describable by the English languagr ands unlike any thing else in existence. The same happenings can be explained by waves. They are divisible can be recombined causing interference .That interfererence could potentiallyt effect the location in which the particle is detected. It just needs the void not to be empty but filled either with a very fine grained substance, smaller than the particles we know-maybe "quark soup". Or even less structured being a uniform consisteny and continuous. This overcomes the issue of spooky action at a distance , and how light is transmitted without a medium to host waves.

Quantum mechanics is a mathematical pseudoscience , There is no reason to accept it anymore than other imagined things imagined to have causal power , especially since it comes with so many problems.

Georgina Woodward
Why do inteligent people who claim to be physisists treat quantum physics as if it is real science. Physics is meant to be natural science ,explaining and modeling the existential World/Universe. Unlike pure mathematics,not grounded by existential considerations. Almost anything that can be imagined can be modlled by maths, freed from the constaint of having to be part of what does or has existed. A superposition is unlike anything known. So difficult to accurately describe with words because, we are told it is, though foundational, not a part of our experience, which words descibe, limited to the macroscopic and astronomic scales.
Waves. however, are known at many scales ,as is a varity of substances that act as host to wave happenings within them. The substance filling the voids does not show itself by reflecting light but allows it's transmission though it. The double slit experiment of Young is evidence of its existence. Prior experiment has failed to provide the evidence of it's existence. But that is not proof of non existence .It just took time to find the right experimental proof and to understand what was being shown. That the voids are filled nmakes sense. Nature abhors vacuum we are told. Action at a distance is hard to explain without it, The structued interior of particles may also benefit from this explanation.

Georgina Woodward
A feature of nature is the occurance of fractal patterns. within the complexity ,the same processes are happening at different scales producing simiar looking results. QM is not like that. It asks for a scale unlike any other. Where there is non locality but not encountered elsewhere at other scales. Where superpostions are modelled to behave unlike the rest of nature.
Waves are known at different scales. They don't require suspension of disbelief.

It is unlikely that the very small quantum scale is utterly unlike larger scales, That non locality applies to the smallest scale but not elsewhere and is not known from larger scales; It doesn't fit with self similarity found throughout nature.

Georgina Woodward
I. Kant was on to something .He realises the need for an obsever independent material existence as well as what we are aware of, our relative perception, but doesn't really explain why this is neccessary.
The necessity of apriori material existence before observer involvemen Georgina Woodward
Human beings do not see material things /objects-themselves. They see liknesses ( observation products also called Image realities) which are formed from the reciept and processing of sensory data obtained at that particular place, at that time, by that observer. What is seen corresponds to the brain activity that is stimulated .In particular the visual cortex where the image is identified and parts of the brain where associated memory and learning is located. The sensory data that is used to provide vision is photon particles ,released by material objects into the environment and carried by waves though it. Only when processed, is the likeness seen. it corresponds to the object when the sesnsory data was released not when recieved by an obsever. Thus it is seen as it was not neccesarily as it is now/ has become. In order to shed sensory data an object must necessarily exist as such.

@"Georgina Woodward"#p168
An observation product generateded by a human sensory sysyem is not a material object, though it may have the appearance of it. It is an incomplete semblance, can not independently function and usually just a surface appearance.
It is generated intrernally although it appears to be outside. the amalgumated hoizontal and vertical dimensions, the perspective dimension and virtual time dimension all pertain to the generated simulation, electrical activation of brain material or, mind, not real matter itself. The simulation is perdurant in a virtual manner, as the parts of it are simulated from sensory data that has taken different times to reach the observer together. The semblance of something as it was can be seen overlaid the material object as it is. The is no reason to assume material objects have parts at different times ,they are likely wholly at a time but have ,according to their type some endurance. Growth, repair and maintenance apply to material objects.

I did think it was strange mathematically that the dimensions of the observation product/ image reality was inside the dimensions of material reality. The observation product being an immaterial consequence of brain activity , a simulation, it is clear that the obsevation product and the percieved dimensions of the product vs the material object , belong to different categories. That needs remembering and is why they are able to fit. E.g. seen - night , sky , mountains, fields, cat and their descriptive dimensions (including time dimension pertaining to delay in sensory reciept and perdurantism) fits inside a material human body standing within a material landcape with a material cat living animal under a night sky full of unseen material , celestial bodies. 3 spatial dimensions, existing wholly -Now but endurant. Sequential change from Now to Now

Georgina Woodward
Time is concepually different depening on whether we are dealing with the immaterial generated seen or material Object reality. i.e. immaterial self generated simulation or material unseen material particdfulate matter.
Universal sequentiaL change of the becoming material, Object reality, is occuring in such a way that it is always-Now. Time can be appreciated by considering the history ( changes of structure or distribution that have occured ) or imagining what will be.
When instead talking about what is appreciated through the senses ,taking here primarily of sight; as well as the sensory data released having been affected by sequential change affecting material source bodies, there is also the variable delay between sensory data release ino the environment and its reciept by an obsever or other body of matter.
The unsensed Object reality has a foliation order that is absolute . All is at the same time and stays at the same one and only time of existing things, though the amount of change varies from place to place. This is like Einstein's proper time when there is hypothetically no delay between sensory data release and reciept for a near clock travelling with the observer. it is also like Newton's absolute passage of time. Additional delay in sensory data reciept is what allows relativity of obsever expierience.
Having the same name for the two different occurances is confusing . This version can be called relative time.